On Saturday, September 22, 2007 12:27 pm Vegard Nossum wrote:I wonder if all these levels are still needed (though I really like the error/err & warning/warn aliases, those always get me :). It seems like fewer levels would make things easier on both kernel developers and administrators; looking at current counts may help figure out which ones could be combined (warning, very naive grep -r data): KERN_EMERG: 371 KERN_ALERT: 236 KERN_CRIT: 602 KERN_ERR: 11961 KERN_WARNING: 6463 KERN_NOTICE: 1142 KERN_INFO: 8491 KERN_DEBUG: 6125 So KERN_ERR is the most common by a pretty large margin, though it seems to me that KERN_NOTICE, KERN_INFO and KERN_DEBUG are mostly redundant and probably make up a majority of the "SIMD FPU exception support was enabled" (as if I care) type messages. Likewise, ERR, ALERT, CRIT and EMERG serve very similar purposes (i.e. something unrecoverable occurred), maybe they could be condensed into one or two levels rather than four? So that would drop us to three levels: KERN_ERR /* something really bad happened, machine is dead or near so */ KERN_WARNING /* you really ought to know about this */ KERN_INFO /* no one but the kernel developer likely cares about this */ But maybe I'm just living in a dream world where then number of printks the kernel spits out suddenly drops by 99% and only actually important messages make it to my log... Jesse -
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 002/196] Chinese: rephrase English introduction in HOWTO |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Andrew Morton | Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 -- sys_fallocate |
| Greg KH | Re: [AppArmor 39/45] AppArmor: Profile loading and manipulation, pathname matching |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 03/37] dccp: List management for new feature negotiation |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Jarek Poplawski | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
